From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!galois!banach!jbaez Mon Jan  6 10:29:50 EST 1992
Article 2418 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca sci.philosophy.tech:1641 comp.ai.philosophy:2418
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!galois!banach!jbaez
>From: jbaez@banach.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Penrose on Man vs. Machine
Keywords: analytic arguments, reflection principle, standard model
Message-ID: <1991Dec27.203112.12957@galois.mit.edu>
Date: 27 Dec 91 20:31:12 GMT
References: <1991Dec23.213632.18047@cambridge.oracorp.com> <1991Dec23.190337.6899@husc3.harvard.edu> <1991Dec27.014138.3071@grayhawk.rent.com>
Sender: news@galois.mit.edu
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 15
Nntp-Posting-Host: banach

In article <1991Dec27.014138.3071@grayhawk.rent.com> siproj@grayhawk.rent.com (D. R. Arthur) writes:

>Does anyone have a list of researches that propose AI development that exceeds
>the mind model of humans?

I'm not sure why the present goals aren't sufficiently ambitious to
satisfy anyone.  :-)  I'm sure, however, that everyone in AI has
contemplated the possibility after a few beers.

>Does anyone or no one agree with the above proposition, that an AI needs to
>be more advanced in mind, than humans, to have real purpose?

Hopefully no-one.  While create beings to outdo us may be the secret
Faustian goal of AI, creating a boring race of automata to do our dirty
work would be more "practical."


